The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1887-09-15
NATIONAL NEWS.

READ your report ON Inc HhllaQeIplla
postoffice case, and have noted YOUR
ton with the postmaster to-day as to
the power of removal of carriers. our
attention is called to page 81, where
you name the the limitations upon the
power of removals. Are we to
understand that the postmaster
may without question remove a
carrier save for the causes enumerated
by you? The postmaster informs me
that he has an opinion of the Assistant
United States District Attorney here to
the effect that he cannot remove car
riers and clerks as well, except for the
causes named in the civil service law,
as quoted by you on page q of the Phil
adelphia report. That every carrier and
clerk in the Cincinnati poStoffice might
be legally removed for cause is propO-
sitiOn on which you need no informa-
ton. 1t is therefore concluded that you
wish to know whether, in the opinion
of the commission efficient carriers and
clerks of good character may be legally
removed for partisan reasons-because
they do not agree on politics with the
postmaster. The commission has
therefore stated, and now repeats, that
the power of removal is unrestricted,
except that removal may not be le-
gally made for any one of the following
causes:
First.-Because a person in the ser
vice has refused to contribute to Il
political fund, or for a political pur-
pose.
Second.-Because a person has re-
fused to render political service.
Third.-Because a person has re-
fused to permit the appointing officer
or any other officer in the civil service
tn cOArc0 his DOlitiCal action
For any other cause, any person in
the civil service may be removed legal
ly, and person Illegally removed for
any of the causes named cannot, under
any provision of the Civil Service Act,
demand restoration. If, then, an APP
pointing officer were to remove one of
his subOrdinates for any one of the
reasons mentioned among the inhibi-
lions of removals, what penalty
could be inflicted upon him?
Civil Service Rule XIV provides
that every violation Of any of the
sections of the civil service act relating
to political assessments shall be good
cause for the removal of the officer
guilty of the violation; and section 10
of that act provides that any person
who shall be guilty of violating any
shall, on conviction thereof, be pun
ished by a fine not exceeding $1,000 or
by Imprisonment for term not exceed
ing three years, or by such fine and i'm
prisonment, or both. If the words
foregoing sections refer to the four
sections next preceding the 18th
section, an appointing officer might be
punished by both fine and imprison-
ment for removing subordinate be-
cause he refused to contribute money
to political fund, or for political
purpose, but no penalty is prescribed
by the act for violation of either the
second or third inhibition upon
removals, and appointing officer might
therefore, without fear of either fine
or imprisonment violate the law by
dismissing subordinates, because they
have refused to render political SER
vice, or because they have refused to
permit the appointing officers OF
other persons in the civil service to
coerce their political action. 1t is to be
presumed, however, that no appoint
ing officers would willingly violate any
provision of the law, but if because he
could not be punished crlminally tor
the violation, and appointing officers
were to violate the removal inhibiting
provisions III question, it may be safe
to conclude that he would not be per-
mitted to remain in Office. No officer
should be continued in the enforce
ment of a law any of the provisions of
which he himself may have willingly
viol ated. In this view it becomes i'm
portaRt to determine whether re-
moval made for partisan reasons falls
under the inhibitions that person in
the republics service shall not be re-
moVed-first because he has refused
to render political service; sec
ond because he has refused
to be coerced in his politi-
cal action. One of the eight funda-
mental provisions of the civil service
rules, as prescribed by the civil ser
vice act is, that no person in the public
service is for that reason under any
obligation to render any political ser
vice, and that he will not be removed
or otherwise prejudiced for refusing to
do so.
Rule VIII provides that no question
in any examination or preceded by, or
under, the Commission of Examiners,
shall call for the expression or disclose
ure of any political opinion or affilia-
ton, and if such opinion or affiliation
be known, no discrimination shall be
made by reason thereof by the exam
liners on the commission Of the ap-
pointing power.
From these provisions of the law and
rules it is concluded: First.-That it is
unlawful to ask an applicant for ap-
pOintment under the Civil Service Law
to divulge his political opinions or affili-
ations.
Second.-That if the appointing Off
Ger ascertain in any way what are the
political opinions or Affiliations of any
applicant for appointment it is unlaw-
full in him therefore either to discrim-
mate for or against him; that it is I'M
lawful in the appointing officer to
appoint an eligible for the reason that
he is, or is not Democrat, or to re-
| fuse appointment to an eligible for the
reason that he is or is not a Republican,
and Vice-VerSa.
Third.-That it is unlawful to re-
move any person from the public ser
vice for refusing to render political
service. The law fairly construed is
| trentrance to the classified civil
service shall be upon the merit of the
applicant without regard to his politi-
cal opinions or affiliations, and that
continuance in the service shall be
upon the employees merit, without re-
gard to his political opinions or affilia-
tions. Therefore the appointing officer
who appoints or refuses to appoint an
| applicant because the applicant does or
does not entertain certain political
| opinions violates the law, and an ap-
pointing officer who removes an en-
ploye because an employe refuses to
render political service in accordance
Il
cer-because he is not a political parti-
san of the appointing officer-also vio-
lateS the law. Entertaining these
views the Commission replies to youI
question by saying that, in the opinion
of the Commission, the postmaster al
Cincinnati cannot lawfully remove any
carrier or clerk for the reason that tht
carrier or clerk belongs to the political
party to which the postmaster is OPP
posed. That he can lawfully remove
no person from the classified postal ser
vice at Cincinnati except for some
other cause than the employees politi
cal opinions or affiliations. -
RECEIVED BY THE PRESIDENT.
President Cleveland came into thu
White House from Oak View this af
ternOon and received Bishop Irelant
and Rev. James A. Steven, of tn
Roman Catholic Mission School. In
; dian affairs was the subject of the in
terYleW. Later in the day, by appoint
ment, the members of the Irish Cath
. Ole Beneficial Association to the nun
Der of lbs, now in session in this city